[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
migrant swallows, few shorebirds Scotland Neck; negative tax for open land?
- To: carolinabirds@duke.edu
- Subject: migrant swallows, few shorebirds Scotland Neck; negative tax for open land?
- From: "Frank Enders" <fkenders@hotmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 12:02:26 -0400
- Delivered-to: pardo@metalab.unc.edu
- Sender: carolinabirds-owner@acpub.duke.edu
On September 1, 2002 only Killdeer (80) and perhaps one yellowlegs (heard
only) were at the Winslow Sod Farm, Stamper Siding Road.
4+ Tree Swallows, 10+ Bank Swallows and 50+ Rough-winged Swallows were on
wires and foraging near Kehukee Swamp where it crosses River Road. Perhaps
20 Barn Swalllows as well.
~6 Red-headed Woodpeckers in a family gave excellent views, flycatching, at
the swamp at the se end of River Road where it ends in a dirt road toward
Norfleet.
What if we got a law passed that 10% of every municipality, county and state
had to be in open land?
Tilled farm acreage could count only as 50% of its acreage (like slaves in
the original constitution counted, but not so much as free
people--eventually maybe we might not even count farmland as open, or we
might count it as open, depending on how it is farmed, relative to wildlife
uses).
Governments would be allowed to trade their open land allotments in a free
market, like trading licenses to put out pollutants. Governments could pay
people to keep land open, in order to reach their required quota of open
land. This would increase the value of farmland, for example, reducing the
economic incentive to develop farms into subdivisions. A straightforward
negative property tax on open land. A boon for undeveloped areas.
I am getting tired of losing bird species and other "wildlife".
When we think about the fact that we are not paying for our environment
(air, water, vistas, wildlife), I think most people will understand that we
are not paying enough in taxes. With so many people pressing on our natural
resources, I do not think we can continue to "afford" a "free ride".
Think about how the NC Hunt administration said we would have a goal of so
much more open land each year. That is not getting done, in the current
recesssion, and will never get done until we apply some serious financial
forces. We need a tax increase earmarked to pay for open land in each of
our governmental units: towns, cities, counties and states; of course, some
units would have monies flowing in!
One might even be effective at pressing places like Brazil and Haiti to
leave land undeveloped, as we leave the same percentage of New York City and
the DC and Triad and Triangle areas open! I would not mind forcing
countries to keep 20% or even 50% open.
The key would be to increase the percentage each year, say, up to 50% open
land in 25 years, 2% more each year.
Let the big cities either provide open land for their inhabitants or pay
rural areas for the open land kept for the biggies.
I think 10% open would be ridiculously easy for governments to achieve, for
starts.
-Frank Enders, Halifax, NC
_________________________________________________________________
Enter for your chance to IM with Bon Jovi, Seal, Bow Wow, or Mary J Blige
using MSN Messenger http://entertainment.msn.com/imastar